Replies to post #601485 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Donotunderstand]

?

Murder is worse
Death from Guns is worse

not sure what you are suggesting? We should not shelter at home? We should not wash our hands? We should let the incidence of a 1-2-3% killer double or triple ?

I believe we fight cancer as much as we can - big time . I assume left unchecked the death rate might be 10x ?

I believe we fight car accidents with laws on speed and better roads and increasing penalties on DUI and mandating (yes GOV mandating) more and more safety equipment on cars. I assume without intervention the number might be 10x

but we intervene with cancer and we intervene with car accidents

are you saying we need to more effective there - I agree ! It is ugly
or
are you saying lets not take this semi plague super seriously - like the UK did for a week - assume it will hit 50-80% of the population and let kill tons more so it rates up there with cancer and auto accidents?

Best estimates are a population will get 50-80 % infected if life goes on as usual. For the US that is 150 million to 250 million people. Is that what you are suggesting

UK - read the literature - assumed there was NO use in trying to contain. That was Boris Johnsons first idea --- let it hit - recover and go on with life. Then we learned in last few weeks everywhere just how powerful shelter at home - do not go to work - wash your hands - space 6 feet is ---- lets guess it cuts the incidence by 80%

Summary
You compare COVID to two larger causes of death
But we as nation attack those causes big time - hard - for years - huge investments of time - money - people
Ant thus the numbers we see - horrible - are POST trying to stop and or reduce deaths

So for COVID - with the potential to infect 150,000,000 easily (per the literature mostly from England) we should not view it as large and as threatening -- ? Let it hit - do not overload hospitals - keep sick at home - and just take the (then) say 2% death rate and get 3,000,000 dead

?

[Donotunderstand]

ok
I explained my thinking - why I was confused and not sure of intent

the deaths from accidents are POST intervention - no one wants them that high but we are fighting like crazy this serious plague

the deaths from cancer are POST intervention -no one wants them that high but we are fighting like crazy this serious plague

so - in that context - that we really fight those "plagues" lets look at this one compared to cancer

cancer
In 2019, there will be an estimated 1,762,450 new cancer cases diagnosed and 606,880 cancer deaths in the United States.

Ok - I frankly assume that without intervention (quit smoking - various other life style changes - SCREENING FOR TONS OF THOSE CANCERS WHICH CAN BE DETECTED EARLY AND WHERE INTERVENTION WORKS - chemo - etc.) --- that without this intervention on the 1.8 million new cases a year - the deaths would be say 1.5 million

Covid
No one has #s but the best estimates are that unchecked it hits the population in cities and metro and suburbs and exurbs (all but rural) at say 50-80% . Again - UK - Boris Johnson per Brit papers - was not nonchalant when he DECIDED not to shelter - he thought the spread could not big time impacted by a ton of intervention that is hard and costly so he did not try. He changed in a week and locked down the country

Why?
Because stay at home and wash and 6 feet etc. etc. does work to contain

scenario one
no efforts and we get say 60% (as 95% of people live in dense of some sort). That is say 200,000,000 cases. So if we also assume with widespread incidence a lot of that 200,000,000 is milder type. So death rate is 1%. That is 2,000,000 deaths

yes efforts - see what NY IL CA CT LA others did early and now impacting 75% of total population - to keep the spread down

estimates are 100,000 to 200,000 deaths

ok - now we are under the # from the other plagues like car accidents and cancer --- but only because we did not battle

so
why - if we battle car accidents and win bigly - and we battle cancer and win bigly (70% ?) - why would we not battle COVID?

Hey - we could wait a year - let 1M or 2M die - but be ready with vaccine and therapeutics next time - in the FALL

That may not be the worst idea - (I think its bad) as the current way to fight is crippling the economy. And with vaccine (ouch - mandatory?) and therapeutics next time we may not need to lock down at all

just saying - I think we failed this time because the only defense (described already) was not used early and hard and in part because we did not test early and widespread

so I will not take it as truth that WE in the country should applaud the FED GOV if ONLY 100,000 to 200,000 die and "consider that a victory"